[TLS] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-tls-esni-24

Tommy Pauly via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 18 April 2025 13:03 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tls@ietf.org
Delivered-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from [10.244.8.129] (unknown [104.131.183.230]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578861E1279F; Fri, 18 Apr 2025 06:03:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Tommy Pauly via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: int-dir@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.38.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <174498139202.1659671.12936370971078370334@dt-datatracker-64c5c9b5f9-hz6qg>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 06:03:12 -0700
Message-ID-Hash: G4Y5VTDPSHXZIUUTW7CZGETPBJ4YEBU3
X-Message-ID-Hash: G4Y5VTDPSHXZIUUTW7CZGETPBJ4YEBU3
X-MailFrom: noreply@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: draft-ietf-tls-esni.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Reply-To: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
Subject: [TLS] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-tls-esni-24
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/y4cxxzUqLA6KxwB-8VT1gnPJm3o>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tls-leave@ietf.org>

Document: draft-ietf-tls-esni
Title: TLS Encrypted Client Hello
Reviewer: Tommy Pauly
Review result: Ready

"I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for <draft-foo.txt>. These comments
were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document
editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat
comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other
Last Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT
Directorate, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/>."

Thanks to the authors for a clear and important document.

>From an INT perspective, I didn’t find any areas of concern. The example IP
addresses used are all v6, so that should make our ADs happy! :) Broadly, the
main relevance for INT here is that the privacy mechanism of obfuscating the
SNI works when at least several different names can be accessed via a common
address or set of addresses. The descriptions of this behavior looked correct.